About your Search

20121121
20121129
STATION
CNNW 12
MSNBCW 10
CSPAN 4
CSPAN2 1
KGO (ABC) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
LANGUAGE
English 39
Search Results 0 to 38 of about 39 (some duplicates have been removed)
" for al qaeda. remember, the administration said she was working from edited talking points. the question is, who did the editing? today, the senators say that acting director morell told them the fbi did. they say they later heard from the cia that he had quote, misspoken and the cia was, in fact, responsible. so what's going on here? cnn intelligence correspondent suzanne kelly has been working her sources. she's joining us now. suzanne, you just got a statement from the cia. what are they saying? >> reporter: actually, i've gotten this statement from an intelligence official who told me it was in fact the cia that made the changes which is more or less what the intelligence community has been saying from the beginning, that this was a collaborative effort within the intelligence community to get their language straight and that the reasons they were doing it had to do with, as you know, classified sources. i can read you what the u.s. intelligence official has just told me. there were literally just coming in on my phone. there were several valid intelligence and investigatory reasons
. "the communicators" airs tonight on c-span. >> last week, he talked about the strategy toward al qaeda. this is about one hour and 15 minutes. >> good evening. thank you for coming. it is an honor to be introducing my boss. he is one of the most respected and experienced hands in washington. his reputation is legendary. he's chairman of the house budget committee when the actually passed a budget. his chief of staff to president clinton in the white house. now secretary of defense. what in the world are you going to do next? this is not action do justice to the man. leon panetta is a wonderful human being and in some ways a man of contrasts. i am going to give you examples. he is known among his counterparts around the world for his warm italian bear hugs. he is also known for the laser light focus he displayed on hunting down osama bin laden. he often holds meetings in his pentagon office with his dog curled up around his feet as he is pressing a commander on how a war plan is going to advance or how they are going to make more progress. when traveling, who he is known to hang out in
from the director of central intelligence agency, that references of al qaeda were taken out for security reasons not for political reasons. do you accept the explanation by ambassador rice? >> i don't believe that the best intelligence assessment on 16, september was that there was a spontaneous event in benghazi based on a video that led to a mob that became a riot. the cia station chief on the day of the attack reported in realtime we're under attack by al qaeda affiliates. the president in libya said on the day of atack -- excuse me on 16, september, al qaeda was involved. we've got drones. released the video. we know what a mob looks like in the mideast. i am increasingly convinced the fbi interviewed the survivors in ramstein, germany, the day after and convinced that the best and current intelligence assessment on 16, september went against the video. the video was a political smoke screen. the actual facts were this was a coordinated preplanned terrorist attack. when the president said on "letterman" we think the video caused this. when he said at the u.n. we won't le
to the salafists and al qaeda, yeah. they are a muslim brotherhood government which is why morsi had the leverage to negotiate the cease-fire. >> mika, a lot of interesting things, talking about foreign policy going on here at home, talking about who the next secretary of state may be, john mccain said, along with lindsey graham and several others, who said they were going to fight susan rice tooth and nail, that sort of changed over the weekend, didn't it? >> that appears to be changing just a tad bit. heilmann, you wrote about it. senator mccain is softening his attacks on u.n. ambassador susan rice after vowing to block her potential nomination as secretary of state. republicans claim ambassador rice deliberately misled the country in the aftermath of the september 11th attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi. but rice says that she's not to blame, arguing she relied on the talking points from the intelligence community. although mccain had threatened a senate filibuster earlier this month, he's now open to meeting directly with miss rice. >> is there anything that ambassador rice can do to c
denied al qaeda's lead role in the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi that cost the lives of ambassador chris stevens and three others and she did so knowing it was true. well, the man who defeated mccain in the 2008 presidential campaign takes this as a personal shot at him. how will he respond? will he name ambassador rice his new secretary of state to replace hillary clinton? will he meet mccain's challenge head on and send rice up to the capitol to go face-to-face with the enemy? tonight we study the battlefield and the firepower of the two sides in this year-ending fire fight. mccain sure wants this fight, but do his fellow republicans? do they want an older white guy taking on the competence of a young woman of color, a rhodes scholar of solid reputation? most important, what end does the president want for this match of fact and wits? i'm joined by michael o'hanlon of the brookings institution and jonathan landay. the intelligence reporter for mcclatchy newspapers. michael, thank you for this. i want to get to the facts. am i right, is the main charge here coming fr
. the unclassified talking points she used were provided by the cia, were stripped of these references to al qaeda, because the information was classified and couldn't be delivered in public. now, after the meeting, ambassador rice acknowledged those talking points turned out to be incorrect. but that she stressed she and the administration never meant to mislead the american people. and what the senators are saying is, as a cabinet member, ambassador rice is privy to this conflicting information, she should have been more discerning when she went on those talk shows, and that the secretary of state should ambassador rice be nominated needs more independent, not just held to party lines. let's take a listen to what senators graham and ayotte said yesterday after those meetings. >> bottom line, i'm more disturbed now than i was before. >> certainly she misled the american public. i think that she would say that. she'd have to say that. >> now, soledad, ambassador rice is not without her supporters. democrats on the hill say rice's republican critics are still the ones politicizing the benghazi atta
stability and prevent al-qaeda's return after nato leaves. he is preparing for confirmation for the next hearing when he was swept in the petraeus e-mail scandal. the inspector general is investigating. >> jennifer griffin, thank you. still ahead, director of national intelligence changes his story. first, we go to point pleasant beach, new jersey, four weeks after hurricane sandy. victor! victor! i got your campbell's chunky soup. mom? who's mom? i'm the giants mascot. the giants don't have a mascot! ohhh! eat up! new jammin jerk chicken soup has tasty pieces of chicken with rice and beans. hmmm. for giant hunger! thanks mom! see ya! whoaa...oops! mom? i'm ok. grandma? hi sweetie! she operates the head. [ male announcer ] campbell's chunky soup. it fills you up right. a hybrid? most are just no fun to drive. she operates the head. now, here's one that will make you feel alive. meet the five-passenger ford c-max hybrid. c-max says ha. c-max says wheeee. which is what you get, don't you see? cause c-max has lots more horsepower than prius v, a hybrid that c-max also bests in mpg. say hi t
senators tuesday it was the fbi that took references to al qaeda out of these unclassified talking points rice used for her tv appearances. but later in the day morell called to say he was wrong. it was actually his agency, the cia. >> i can't help but feel incredibly disappointed that we were told something at 10:00 a.m. that couldn't withstand scrutiny for six hours and that's totally inconsistent with what we were told the day before. we now have five different explanations of who changed the talking points to take out benghazi and four different reasons. this is becoming a joke. >> reporter: it is quite surprising that the acting cia director gave incorrect information on something as politically explosive as the controversial talking points that susan rice used in a meeting with among the administration's chief republican critics. you know, the answer to why he did it according to senators is simply that he misspoke, wolf. >> so a quick question, dana. does that mean michael morell if the president were to nominate him to become the permanent director of the cia he would have problem
the opportunity to discuss these issues with her. why did she say that -- why did she say that al qaeda has been decimated? in her statement, here, on this program. al qaeda has not been decimated. they are on the rise. they are all over iraq. training camps are in libya. they are all overseer ye syria on the rise in the middle east and there's a lot of questions for ambassador rice and i'm sure i'll have the opportunity to discuss these with her. >> chris: but you are saying that she could conceivably get your vote for secretary of state? >> i think she deserves the ability and the opportunity to explain herself and her position. just as she said. but, she's not the problem. the problem is the president of the united states, who, on -- in a debate with mitt romney, said that he had said it was a terrorist attack and he hadn't and in fact that night on "60 minutes" he said they didn't know what kind of an attack it was and continued to say -- >> he said in an interview with "60 minutes" which we didn't see -- >> didn't see until after the election, i'm sure that it was such an inconsequential st
under oath in front of congress that he had no idea how the words al-qaeda and other phrases were removed from the talking points that cia prepared and later were reinserted. he said he didn't know how that happened, and he put out a statement earlier this week saying it happened in his shop. those are two totally contradictory things he's saying. gregg: and by the way, it's a crime to lie to congress. but let me move on. the president's news conference last week, he said the people elected him to work with the other side and not to get into partisan fights. but, steve, if he nominates rice to be the next secretary of state, wouldn't that trigger a major partisan fight, and would he really do that when, after all, he's trying to reach a bipartisan deal to avoid the fiscal cliff? >> right. look, i would be surprised if the president put her forward given everything that we've seen. there were one or two scenarios, right? either she was, this was a tryout for her and she failed, or it was the case that they sent her out on purpose as the president suggested when he said they sent ou
't involved in removing the information on al qaeda. he said the intelligence community made the changes. in responding to this report, mccain admitted that he was wrong, but still took a shot at the white house. he said intelligence officials, quote, told us they did not know who made the changes. now we have to read the answers to our questions in the media. this latest episode is another reason why many of us are so suspicious of actions of this administration when it comes to the benghazi attack. meanwhile, his sidekick, lindsey graham, is going into full attack mode. senator graham wrote a letter to president obama on tuesday, saying that he's concerned. many questions remain unanswered on the benghazi attacks. he says the president has a duty to the american people to answer the basic questions surrounding the benghazi attack. so far, all of the right-wing conspiracy theories about the benghazi attack have been completely wrong. it's about time they dropped all of this nonsense and just went back to doing their jobs. let's bring in democratic consultant, tara doudel, and also with
interviews saying that the obama administration has decimated al qaeda. what senator ayotte and other senators have said is that was misleading because she knew in a classified way that al qaeda might have been behind it. so that is what one -- two of the reasons why at least senator ayotte said that she is troubled. and she said that she is still not ready to say that she will vote for her. not only that, but she's still -- she still has a threat to block her nomination if susan rice is nominated. >> and is that the end of it, or are there future meetings? is there going to be more consultation, or is that that? >> reporter: no, that is not that. that is the beginning of this for sure. we understand that the ambassador is likely to be back later today for more meetings. ted barrett heard from the republican from tennessee that he has a meeting with susan rice tomorrow. again, just like today's meeting. that was at the request of susan rice. she is definitely making the rounds. she's trying to explain herself. but at least with these three republican senators this morning who were --
that those with ties to al qaeda were involved in the attack on the embassy and clearly the impression that was given was wrong. ambassador rice said today absolutely it was wrong. said't understand the cia clearly that information was wrong and they knew by the 22nd it was wrong yet they have not clear that up with the american people to date including they said this was the reaction to to the video, the attacks. what troubled me also is obviously, the changes made to the unqualified talking points were misleading. just to be clear, when you have a position where you are ambassador to the you knighted nations, you go well beyond -- unitedador to the nations, you go well beyond talking points. in addition to, it is not just the talking collins, but clearly it is her responsibility as an ambassador to the united nations to do much more than that. >> before anyone can make an intelligent and decision, we need to do a lot more. to this date, we do not have the fbi interviews of the survivors from after the attack. we do not have the basic information about what was said about the night of
in benghazi that the intelligence community knew that there were links to al qaeda. as you remember, in five different television appearances, she said there was no evidence that the attack was preplanned. now senator mccain has said she misled the public. ambassador rice says she respect s mccain but that some of his criticisms are unfounded. as cbs news has reported her unclassified talking points were edited by the intelligence community, who removed references to al qaeda, not the white house or the state department, who did that specifically is under review by senate intelligence committee. >> margaret, thank you. >>> president obama meets with small business owners today to promote his solution to the fiscal cliff. the deadline is now 35 days away. the president is holding more events tomorrow and friday. "new york times" reports this morning that a budget deal could reduce the tax deduction millions pay on their mortgage interest. nancy cordes is on capitol hill. good morning. >> reporter: good morning to you, charlie, and norah. the president and house speake
it in themselves to soften. here is the thing the way i understand it. they pulled al-qaeda out of the talking points and pulled the protest out of the talking points and she still went with it. she still went with it and told the american people everything she was told to say. >> bob: learn how the process works. c.i.a. is one of a number of intelligence agencies that put talk points. they didn't have the agre agreement. she got factual in their view, intelligence community view of what happened. she gave it to the sunday talk show. she made a mistake and said she made a mistak miswhat more u ask for? do you think he is went up and there purposefully lied? >> brian: shouldn't you do your research? >> andrea: yes. she knew there were conflicting accounts. why push anyone from the administration out to say anything at all. she should have done her research. maybe she is not a liar. maybe she is incatch tent. one thing that the senator trying to block you. it was great what mccain did. getting the heat. and republicans were being sexist. and let me give her a fair shake. john bolton was up for a
carrier waits for the body of osama bin laden. it's may 2, 2011, the al qaeda leader has just been killed. two u.s. navy admirals use code words to describe bin laden. the commander says fed ex delivered the package, both trucks are safely on route home base. the e-mails heavily redakted have just been released by the defense department responding to a freedom of information act washdog. a few days earlier that strike dog asked do i need any special religious ceremonial preparations. after bin laden's buried at sea, an admiral describes the scene. tradition traditional procedures for islamic burial was followed. the deceased body was washed then placed in a white sheet then a military officer read prepared religious remarks which were translated into arabic. tipped up whereupon the deceased body slid into the sea. according to e-mails, there aren't many witnesses. in response to the question, any sailors watch the burial, burial, no sailors watched. and another says only a small group of the leadership was informed. less than a dozen total. and another indication of the secrecy of that pa
and al qaeda were taken out for a couple of reasons. one, the intelligence was evolving and they didn't want to tip them off. we need to let this go. the fiscal cliff and jobs are far more important. >> and let's talk about the fiscal cliff and jobs. in your time in california you worked on in the state assembly, a state hit hard by a fiscal y crisis. >> i sure did. >> i want to talk to you about something you said in terms of medicare reform and medicaid. obviously republicans are saying, look, in exchange for any type of taxes going up, we want to see some real entitlement reform. you talk about cracking down on waste, fraud and abuse. is there enough revenue from waste, fraud and abuse and m medicare to get the type of serious deficit reform needed to bring down the $16 trillion debt? >> well, you know, i think anytime you're talking about a deficit, there's two ways to bring it down, and i know you know this well. you're either going to raise revenue or have cuts, and i would continue to argue for a balanced approach which means i do think you can find savings in both programs.
organization. like you wouldn't deal with al qaeda. the egyptians, yes, they have special relations with them. i think the egyptian involvement was very valuable. i think the leadership that was xer s exercised by president obama and hillary clinton was tremendous. and the formalities are of less consequences than the intentions and indeed the dealing on the ground. >> i understand that. but it also seems that formalities, especially on this issue that is so intractable, they -- they're more than formalities. that is a sign of something so much deeper. which brings me to egypt. you negotiated now using egypt as an interimmediate airy. they're an islamist government. their president appeared at rallies where they talk about jerusalem as the capital of the arabs, there are chants we are all hamas. as you said, he stepped up and played a pro active role here. are you setting a precedent where you're going to have to talk to hamas? >> well, again, we will be very happy to talk to hamas. we have been ready to talk to hamas since they took over gaza, actually in a coup against the plo. but first, t
not to say because we didn't want al qaeda to know we knew it at that point. the real question is why is mccain making this attack and wasting whatever political capital and reputation he has left? >> reporter: well, some people are wondering does mccain want to simply stay in the spotlight? mccain is known for foreign policy. he's known for going on sunday shows. the benghazi issue gets him back in the spotlight. everyone is talking about john mccain again. so some people wonder if there's a little bit of political opportunism there. >> i want to go back to something krystal said a minute ago. closing ranks behind susan rice because much political battle lines in this. you made the point earlier if you just looked at this without regard to benghazi and said john mccain realistically speaking, who potentially could appoint secretary of state that would agree ideological with you. realistically susan rice is as good as he can do. the consensus in the democratic party is probably to the right of it. i wonder is there any push-back from the left or from democrats in washington toward the admin
al-qaeda -- the taliban seems enmeshed and woven into the fabric of society. what have we accomplished? >> the book traces this one outpost from 2006 until 2009 when overrun by the taliban. in 2007-2008, that's a part of the narrative when there actually is very tangible achievement and the u.s. and the afghan government is willing to win over the local populous and get them to start casting out the terrorists in the villages and hamlets and this one lieutenant, alex newsom who was in afghanistan early this year doing special operations missions, says that when he went back to this area, the people there all remembered him. they were still anti-taliban. they were still willing to fight. he was very encouraged. as i said, he's in the minority there. but it wasn't as if all of these individuals, all of a sudden became taliban. mainly they don't want anyone bothering them. >> eliot: that's the question. no doubt. our presence there can have that affirmative effect. was it possible -- is it possible to argue tha
yesterday against al qaeda terrorists. [ man thinking ] oh, this gas. those antacids aren't working. oh no, not that, not here! [ male announcer ] antacids don't relieve gas. gas-x is designed to relieve gas. gas-x. the gas xperts. we create easy to use, powerful trading tools for all. look at these streaming charts! they're totally customizable and they let you visualize what might happen next. that's genius! strategies, chains, positions. we put 'em all on one screen! could we make placing a trade any easier? mmmm...could we? open an account today and get a free 13-month e ibd™ subscription when you call 1-888-280-0157 now. optionsxpress by charles schwab. [ male announcer ] introducing a brand new medicare prescription drug plan. it's called the aarp medicarerx saver plus plan from unitedhealthcare. and it's for people who want the lowest part d premium in the united states... only $15 a month. and copays could be as low as a dollar. so call unitedhealthcare now to enroll or learn more. with this plan, you can save 40% or more on your copays by using a preferred network pharmacy, in a
went on and basically defied what the president of libya said when he said al qaeda was involved. she said no. she continued to go back to this story that had to do with a spontaneous demonstration and about a bad video. and the bottom line is for secretary of state, you want somebody who actually can think about these issues, makes reasoned decisions, and asks tough questions. and i think she has failed that. and to me she has disqualified herself for secretary of state. >> here's what some democrats had to say about the rice nomination. let me play this for you, senator. >> i think it wouldn't be fair to disqualify her based on what she said on those sunday morning shows. >> i find it mind-boggling that some of the gop senators continue to go after her. it's completely unjustified. and i can only conclude that having failed to deny the president a second term they now want to deny him the cabinet of his choice. >> congressman schiff isn't the only one suggesting that opponents are playing politics with this. in addition to that, look, you've been on sunday talk show, you know how th
in the middle-east is inviting this change to go in the wrong direction. al qaeda is on the rise, the islamists are on the rise. morsesi looked at iraq and saw al-maliki on the rise. our policy should be all in, keeping with our national interest and keeping with our values and help shape morsi. he is not going away. >> how do you think the president will walk the line of not getting involved in affairs we shouldn't be involved and and stopping the dominoes that are falling, one by one and balancing our national security, which is definitely impacted? >> it definitely is. there are four transition governments. one is in libya, we have a moderate government there that we influence, our failed policy there led to benghazi. syria -- that's unfolding, also tunisia and yemen. those countries are yet to be resolved. we can definitely influence that. if we don't influence that, if we sit on our hands, it is likely that radical islamists will have undue influence. >> shannon: how long do you think the cease-fire holds between hamas and israel? >> no one knows for sure. but i think it will hold for a wh
. anybody looking at the threats, it would jump out at you that this was an al qaeda storm in the making. i'm disappointed in our intelligence community. i think they failed in many ways. but with a little bit of inquiry and curiosity i think it is pretty clear that to explain this episode as related to a video that created a mob that turned into a riot was far afield and at the end of the day, we're going to get to the bottom of this. we have to have a system we can trust, and if you don't know what happened, just say you don't know what happened. people can push you to give explanations and you can say, i don't want to give bad information. here's what i can tell you. the american people got bad information on 16 september. they got bad information from president obama days after. and the question is, should they have been giving the information at all? if you can do nothing but give bad information, isn't it better to give no information at all? my belief is, not only is the information bad, and i'm more convinced than ever that it was bad, it was unjustified to give the scenario as pres
this growing asymmetry of power and not just al qaeda, hezbollah was the cyberspace, but it can be very positive, too. the next is bill gates a nonstate, look what he's done and how he's contributed. zucker berquist is to develop a society of a billion people network. there's been a positive examples if you look at the asymmetry of power. i won't nonstate at yours and increasingly this complex, global, integrated that oldfield or marketplace. such is the nature of war and risk we have to understand better. secondly, cyberspace. my good friend, general mike hayden has talked about the coming pearl harbor in cyberspace and i agree with him. it's going to happen and we are willfully bug prepared. the third area i was stressed is the growing demographic shift worldwide. for the first time as of last year more people live in cities and that trend is accelerating. if you like in societies like africa, what does that mean in terms of demographics or resources? these changes will accelerate and we need to be better prepared for the across-the-board. those are three large general chunks we shoul
. there is no question. >> there is a question. >> how the al qaeda references were eliminated. was it james clapper? was it the justice department? was it somebody else. that we don't know the answer to and maybe the confirmation hearings for susan rice will reveal that. however, i think what's striking about this "washington post" piece, and again, it is online by stephanie mccrummon anybody can read it, how obvious it is they are setting her to run for president in 2016. as soon as she leaves the state dipt which will be probably next, a little while, articles like this will be seen, part of a fund-raising pitch. hillary is your obvious choice, democrats to run for president. look at all the puffy praise. every bad thing that happened in the obama administration foreign policy not saying all bad but this article now wipes all those away. she is beloved. everybody loves her. she spent 30 years in public service which i don't quite understand how they got the math on that. nonetheless they're saying it that way. and i think it's reminder what we have to look forward to in the next four years. >> th
references to al qaeda being involved. so another question for her would clearly be, who changed that, who decided not to include that, right? >> let's come to the second point. that she says she simply read these talking points and if that's true, really poses a much more fundamental question. why did she read the talking points? and it goes to a basic disagreement about how senior officials function in government. there are plenty of people, and i can same secretaries of state, who simply regurgitate what their bureaucracies produced for them, who relied on talking points. talking points were put in front of them and they read them. that is one way to approach government. that is not the way i approached government and got me in considerable trouble from time to time. if that is the way she approached it i think there is question whether from a point of view of judgment that is something that you want to see perpetuated. martha: talk about the politics of all of this for a moment because there's a reason that susan rice requested these meetings with these three senators. we know she is b
. they will examine why rice told americans the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi was spontaneous and not al qaeda related. rice is most likely hoping this round of meetings goes better than yesterday's. >> we are significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got and some that we didn't get. the bottom line, i'm more disturbed now than i was before. >> she misled the american public. i think that she would say that. she'd have to say that. >> our senior congressional correspondent dana bash is on capitol hill. a question for you. how can someone who wants to be america's top diplomat go into a meeting and make things worse? >> reporter: it is inexplicable is the honest answer to that question, carol. now, let's just be clear here. the people she had a meeting with, though, yesterday are her most rabid critics, those three senators you just played right before coming to me, so they definitely, you know, not that they wouldn't give her a fair hearing but they have been very, very critical of her from the start saying that they would potentially block her nomination even before talking
, what happened is he told the senators that it was actually the fbi who took al qaeda references out of the unclassified talking points. only to call back several hours later saying, oops, i was wrong, it wasn't the fbi, it was the cia. here is what lindsey graham said about that. >> i can't help but feel incredibly disappointed that we were told something at 10:00 a.m. that couldn't withstand scrutiny for six hours. and is totally inconsistent with what we were told the day before. we have five different explanations of who changed the talking points to take out benghazi. and four different reasons. this is becoming a joke. >> so what these meetings least this particular issue has done is added fuel to the fire and it is not like, you needed to add any more fuel to the fire, especially for senators like lindsey graham who is already really publicly outraged about a lot of issues dealing with the benghazi attack. >> this is just one more. one more. dana bash, thank you. >>> after trashing the hit tv show "two and a half men," the actor angus jones, now back tracking from his controve
that they knew that those with ties to al qaeda work involved in the attacks in the embassy, and clearly the information given to the american people was wrong. in fact, ambassador rice said today absolutely it was wrong. i don't understand the cia said clearly that information was wrong, and they knew by the 22nd that it was wrong. they have not clear that up with the american people, and coming forward in saying they were wrong, including the president of the united states also talking about the fact that it was a reaction to the video. what troubles me also is that obviously the changes made, the unclassified talking points were misleading, but just to be clear, when you have a position where your and ambassador to the united nations, you go well beyond classified talking points in your daily responsibilities, and that is troubling to me as well, i am a person that got -- does not know anything about this and i am going on every single show. is part of our responsibility as an ambassador to the united nations to review much more than that. >> before anybody could make an intelligent d
Search Results 0 to 38 of about 39 (some duplicates have been removed)